home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27 / NN_1992_27.iso / spool / talk / abortion / 48207 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1992-11-17  |  1.7 KB

  1. Xref: sparky talk.abortion:48207 alt.abortion.inequity:5145 soc.women:19748 soc.men:19429 alt.feminism:4587
  2. Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity,soc.women,soc.men,alt.feminism
  3. Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnewsk!cbnewsj!decay
  4. From: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
  5. Subject: Re: compromise
  6. Organization: AT&T
  7. Distribution: na
  8. Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 13:18:24 GMT
  9. Message-ID: <1992Nov17.131824.24260@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>
  10. Followup-To: talk.abortion
  11. References: <1992Nov5.195956.27302@ncsu.edu> <Bx9n9K.Mu2.2@cs.cmu.edu> <nyikos.721974002@milo.math.scarolina.edu>
  12. Keywords: Holtsinger refuted
  13. Lines: 34
  14.  
  15. In article <nyikos.721974002@milo.math.scarolina.edu>, nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
  16. > In <_3s1=gk@rpi.edu> keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:
  17. > >peter honey, you just quoted someone other than susan
  18. > >garvin as if the person you were quoting were susan
  19. > >garvin. what you just did could be referred to as
  20. > >forgery.
  21. > Show me where I did that.
  22. > >as i told you when you lied about adrienne regard
  23. > >posting a forgery,
  24. > I never *said* she posted a forgery.  What does ?!?!?!?!? mean to you?
  25. > > then apologize to
  26. > >adrienne for lying about her.
  27. > I never lied about adrienne.
  28. > Peter Ny.
  29.  
  30. Peter, why do you folow-up a posting if you're only going to
  31. lie throughout?  You did accuse Adrienne of forging a posting
  32. simply because you couldn't understand the attributions
  33. lines and you also made a recent posting in which you said
  34. all kinds of your usual idiotic things about Susan Garvin's
  35. statements, except it wasn't Susan Garvin's statements you were
  36. responding to, it was J. Greenfield's.  For a supposed
  37. PhD, you sure are a dope.
  38.  
  39. Dean Kaflowitz
  40.